Privilege / Reflections on the House

Reflections on the House

Journals pp. 709-10

Debates pp. 6919-20

Background

Rising on a question of privilege, Mr. Fulton (Kamloops) claimed that certain words used by Mr. Pearson (Prime Minister) in the course of a CBC interview broadcast the previous evening constituted a slander on the Members of the House. In referring to the Government's loss of the third reading vote of a bill on Monday, February 19, of that week, the Prime Minister characterized the event as a "kind of trickery" and the resulting situation as "manufactured". Mr. Fulton, therefore, moved that in view of these offending words and phrases "this House take action ... as may be in accord with the practices and conventions established for the protection and safeguarding of [its] privileges". After permitting an explanation from the Prime Minister, the Speaker heard comments from other Members and ruled.

Issue

Can remarks made by a Member outside the House that are critical of its proceedings constitute a breach of privilege?

Decision

In this particular case, there is no question of privilege.

Reasons given by the Speaker

The claim that the words "manufactured crisis" or "trickery" are in themselves libellous or slanderous cannot be accepted. "The fact that a statement is untrue does not necessarily form the basis of a question of privilege. The only way in which there could be a breach of privilege would be for the word 'trickery' itself to be considered as slanderous . . . [Having] regard to the manner in which the word was used on this occasion in a general way, in the course of a general statement, it cannot be considered ... as a personal offence to [the] integrity [of] Members of Parliament." More time than usual has been allowed for comments because the matter was of such importance that all Members should be given the opportunity to give advice or explain their positions. Normally, however, "the Speaker should rise as early as possible after the motion has been raised to rule whether or not there is a prima facie case of privilege".

Sources cited

Beauchesne, 4th ed., p. 102, c. 113.

References

Debates, February 22, 1968, pp. 6909-19.